Alberta to have $11.6 Billion surplus

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

I find anyone who equates an 'artist' to an unemployed, lazy adult is disturbing. That is a severe misconception, and for every case that uses that excuse to sit on their duff all day, there's at least 5-10 who are working jobs for self-sustainment and funding.

I have that perception because some artists want gov't subsidies because their line of work can't pay their bills, and I don't think that's a taxpayer's problem.

[RubberDuck]

Originally Posted by Gozer

I have that perception because some artists want gov't subsidies because their line of work can't pay their bills, and I don't think that's a taxpayer's problem.

Bingo! My line of work, although not as fun or cool as being an artist, pays the bills. I remember wanting to be an astronaut when I grew up but then reality kicked in. It seems that for some unsuccessful artists reality never kicks in and they think society should compensate them because their dream job doesn't pay.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by peter12

Haven't they been trying to make it for like 10 years?

12 years and don't matter how much funding they get, they won't "make it" unless the people want them too

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by RubberDuck

Bingo! My line of work, although not as fun or cool as being an artist, pays the bills. I remember wanting to be an astronaut when I grew up but then reality kicked in. It seems that for some unsuccessful artists reality never kicks in and think society should compensate.

Agreed.

I'm not lucky enough to make a livable monthly wage off music yet, so I have a full-time day job as well. And believe me, it is not fun or cool.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Gozer

I have that perception because some artists want gov't subsidies because their line of work can't pay their bills, and I don't think that's a taxpayer's problem.

Alot of things people don't think are taxpayer's problems, but they are. Let's take a look at the National Portrait Gallery - the federal government is the primary financial backing behind it, and where do you think they get that money from? And that said, would you not want a big new venue that will elevate Calgary's arts and culture scene? I would say something like that is part and parcel of a growing city. Furthermore, artists work from all over Canada, often times who have received public grants, will have work showcased there.

Does that not mean anything to you? Or are you content with more commerical and residential towers as the entire range of our architecture in this city?

I'm sorry, but you're not likely to get Encana or Imperial to put up tens of millions of dollars for a top-tier art gallery. Therefore, the government must step in and contribute. And when we have a windfall of money like our projected surplus, no time like the present to help invest in Alberta's creative future.

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

Providing opportunities for kids is more important and I'm sorry I got a little wonky there. I objected to the comment "arts should be the last thing" because that was too far. Let me put it to you like this (and I can't believe I'm actually going to use this as an example...but...):

Calgary is the marching capital of Canada. Easily. We have four community based music programs that operate marching field corps. Each one of these organizations operates millions of dollars of equipment and an annual budget of over $100,000 each.

None of these programs have ever seen any kind of substantial public money. Granted, the Stampede pays for their group, but the others are left to fund raising drives (casino's, bingo's, other stuff). And for a 130 piece corps with tonnes of gear, trucks, and expenses. Imagine what breakfast costs!

Yet, the hockey players who are a dime a dozen whine and whine for new arenas and the like while offering nothing back to the city. Whereas these other organizations which have asked nothing bring glory to our city, representing all around the world.

Basically, it boils down to "Redneck Priorities".

Moreover, artistically engaged youth tend to become artistically engaged adults, but how many kids when done playing hockey at 16-17 become physically inactive for the rest of their lives?

I think we've gone off point here a bit, i don't have a issue with providing funding to various youth programs whether they be hockey, soccer, marching bands, choirs etc. However, this was the initial proposal.

3) Subsidize and/or give tax breaks to artists (musicians, painters, filmmakers, etc.) to get artists to STAY in the province and let them thrive. This is working wondrously in Ireland, let's try it out here.

IMO something completely different. I believe once you're done school and on your own, you should bear the brunt of the responsibility for supporting yourself. If your art can't support you on its own merits, then buck up and take a second job or maybe it's just time for a career change.

As someone else mentioned, because i played hockey earlier in life should i be entitled to recieve funding so i can continue to play in the beer leagues many years after any hope of me being able to support myself from hockey disappears?? How many people here who want more funding for the arts, crap a brick any time spending public money on a new hockey arena for the Flames comes up???

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Alot of things people don't think are taxpayer's problems, but they are. Let's take a look at the National Portrait Gallery - the federal government is the primary financial backing behind it, and where do you think they get that money from? And that said, would you not want a big new venue that will elevate Calgary's arts and culture scene? I would say something like that is part and parcel of a growing city. Furthermore, artists work from all over Canada, often times who have received public grants, will have work showcased there.

Does that not mean anything to you? Or are you content with more commerical and residential towers as the entire range of our architecture in this city?

I don't mind governments building places to showcase art, but they should not be in the business of deciding which artists are deserving of hand-outs.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

Providing opportunities for kids is more important and I'm sorry I got a little wonky there. I objected to the comment "arts should be the last thing" because that was too far. Let me put it to you like this (and I can't believe I'm actually going to use this as an example...but...):

Calgary is the marching capital of Canada. Easily. We have four community based music programs that operate marching field corps. Each one of these organizations operates millions of dollars of equipment and an annual budget of over $100,000 each.

None of these programs have ever seen any kind of substantial public money. Granted, the Stampede pays for their group, but the others are left to fund raising drives (casino's, bingo's, other stuff). And for a 130 piece corps with tonnes of gear, trucks, and expenses. Imagine what breakfast costs!

Yet, the hockey players who are a dime a dozen whine and whine for new arenas and the like while offering nothing back to the city. Whereas these other organizations which have asked nothing bring glory to our city, representing all around the world.

Basically, it boils down to "Redneck Priorities".

Moreover, artistically engaged youth tend to become artistically engaged adults, but how many kids when done playing hockey at 16-17 become physically inactive for the rest of their lives?

Your not going to get taken seriously if you keep suggesting that people who don't share your view have "Redneck Priorities".

There is a demand for hockey rinks.
There is not much for a marching band.

People need to find their own ways to support the "Arts". For example i do some work for a local theatre...and charge them 1/8th of what I usually do. They dont' have the money to pay in full, but i think its important that they have use of my services to help get the word out.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by troutman

I don't mind governments building places to showcase art, but they should not be in the business of deciding which artists are deserving of hand-outs.

Exactly... the government's obligations end at providing showcases, and creating incentives for philanthropy. Aside from that, artists are on their own with their private patrons.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by RubberDuck

Bingo! My line of work, although not as fun or cool as being an artist, pays the bills. I remember wanting to be an astronaut when I grew up but then reality kicked in. It seems that for some unsuccessful artists reality never kicks in and they think society should compensate them because their dream job doesn't pay.

So you're typecasting unsuccessful artists into people who just want money to pay the bills?

I know lots of artists who DO things to pay bills, 10x more than those who sit around waiting for handouts.

And, waiting for handouts isn't only an 'artist' thing... there's many different types of people that do the same thing.

[CaptainCrunch]

I'd like to define that the work that I do is art. Frankly, I consider myself an artist, I mean don't they call Subway employees Sandwich artists?

Who defines the art?

Well because my title is artist I demand $15,000 dollars from the government to support my career choice.

(Please note I'm not a subway employee)

mmmm subway

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by Dan02

As someone else mentioned, because i played hockey earlier in life should i be entitled to recieve funding so i can continue to play in the beer leagues many years after any hope of me being able to support myself from hockey disappears??

No you shouldn't. Difference is artists are fully functional their whole lives whereas hockey players are generally done by 40 yrs old.

How many people here who want more funding for the arts, crap a brick any time spending public money on a new hockey arena for the Flames comes up???

I personally don't bricks. I know some who do, but one must admit there is a severe disparity between hockey arenas and art spaces. Adults use the arenas too, so why do only hockey playing adults get publicly funded facilities?

Don't try and tell me there are more adult hockey players than adult artists!

Also, for the record, I wish Calgary had some new arenas. It makes me upset when I read about kids getting turned away, but not when I hear depressed middle-aged alcoholics bitching about how they can't get a decent ice-time.

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Alot of things people don't think are taxpayer's problems, but they are. Let's take a look at the National Portrait Gallery - the federal government is the primary financial backing behind it, and where do you think they get that money from? And that said, would you not want a big new venue that will elevate Calgary's arts and culture scene? I would say something like that is part and parcel of a growing city. Furthermore, artists work from all over Canada, often times who have received public grants, will have work showcased there.

Does that not mean anything to you? Or are you content with more commerical and residential towers as the entire range of our architecture in this city?

It is not the gov't place to decide how taxpayer's money should be spent.

Govt: Oh silly taxpayer, you're not smart enough to know that you need local ska bands and ice sculptures. Don't worry, we know better.

It's not their place to make that decision, right and wrong are of no consequence.

Now, that's not universally speaking. I think that military museums are important and I'm sure you can get me to admit there are a few other legitimate gov't funded areas, but $7.5 trillion and we've had several posters on here suggest we need to throw more money at it? Ludicrous.

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by Muta

And, waiting for handouts isn't only an 'artist' thing... there's many different types of people that do the same thing.

And they all piss me off.

[Ozy_Flame]

I think people are losing sight of what funding artists is about; it's not to make it so that everyone is a Broadway superstar; it's about creating an environment for art to exist, and at a noticeable and enjoyable level. Here is a link to those 'starving, unemployed bums' that some of you are referring to, which is a list of annual funding given to people / groups in Ireland from the Arts Council:

http://www.artscouncil.ie/en/we_funded.aspx

You'll notice more than half of them are registered companies and businesses, who are trying to raise funds to create output for society. last I checked, there wasn't any "homeless Joe" or "Welfare Willy" on that list.

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

I think people are losing sight of what funding artists is about; it's not to make it so that everyone is a Broadway superstar; it's about creating an environment for art to exist, and at a noticeable and enjoyable level.

I understand that, I also think its a gross overreaching of governmental authority.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Gozer

It is not the gov't place to decide how taxpayer's money should be spent.

Yes it is, that's why we elect people to make decisions for us. Otherwise we'd be having 10 referendums a day trying to decide Albertan policy.

Not quite sure how you can derive such a conclusion....

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

Your not going to get taken seriously if you keep suggesting that people who don't share your view have "Redneck Priorities".

What do you mean "keep suggesting?"

I brought it up once.

There is a demand for hockey rinks.
There is not much for a marching band.

So when I was a kid, I saw tonnes of hockey players from Calgary getting commanded by the Queen of England to march through the gates of Buckingham Palace and perform. But you're right, we don't need anything but hockey...

People need to find their own ways to support the "Arts". For example i do some work for a local theatre...and charge them 1/8th of what I usually do. They dont' have the money to pay in full, but i think its important that they have use of my services to help get the word out.

[/quote]

Welcome to my world as a live sound engineer. Actually, considering your description, is that what you do as well?

This wasn't supposed to turn into hockey vs something else debate. Sorry for ratting on it because I love hockey as much as the next guy and even some more. Its just the most obsessed over, and usually to the exclusion of other things.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Gozer

Now, that's not universally speaking. I think that military museums are important and I'm sure you can get me to admit there are a few other legitimate gov't funded areas, but $7.5 trillion and we've had several posters on here suggest we need to throw more money at it? Ludicrous.

I think we're takling about Calgary in general, with Albertan-made money... not from any federal coffers.

I still stand by my belief that the future doctors and scientists that Alberta produces will usually come from backgrounds in which art - of all sorts - is a regular element during their child / teenage upbringing. Again, culturally enriching experiences / mindsets spawn creativity and imagination later on that can translate into MANY DIFFERENT positive contributions from Alberta on not just a provincial, not just a national, but an INTERNATIONAL level.

[JBR]

Sign Langkow long term.